HOME | CONTRIBUTE A STORY! | ABOUT MMI | CATEGORIES OF INTEREST | CONTACT ME

image

Watchdogging the Watchdogs

Orginally published on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 at 4:02 AM
by Todd Rhoades

Scott has a fascinating article over at his Verum Serum blog. Her writes... As the issues connected to Christian “watch-dogging” have heated up, I have become more and more fascinated with the whole concept of people feeling as though they have been called upon (by God) to keep watch over the rest of us. Mind you, I’m not speaking of the “pastors as shepherds of their flock” kind of watching, but more along the lines of the “Big Brother is watching you” kind of watching...

John’s excellent post about John Macarthur and his upcoming book Truth War gives clear evidence as to just how high up the “watch-dogging” craze goes. When prominent Church leaders begin to advocate a “devil in our midst” philosophy (no pun intended), then the lower ranks may take their lead and begin seeing the devil everywhere as well. Think Salem Witch trials but without the burning at the stake (at least not yet)…

According to the proponents of these “discernment” ministries, almost everything that is happening in the American Christian church is bad/negative/apostate in some form or another…

In their minds, these people are the faithful remnant while the vast majority of people involved in the American Church have abandoned Christ. From their perspective, this wholesale apostasy leaves only the few who REALLY know and REALLLY understand how Christianity is REALLY supposed to work, leaving the rest of us out in the cold and in the Dark.

But how do these “watch-doggies” end up where they are at, believing themselves to be among the few faithful while the overwhelming majority of the Church (at least in the States) are traveling down the road to ruin? I would suggest one possibility – They have tickled their own ears.

Click here to continue to read Scott’s great article on Watchdogging the Watchdogs...

Then, come back here to MMI… I’d love to hear your comments on this one…



This post has been viewed 611 times so far.


  There are 16 Comments:

  • Posted by

    The article fails to mention the outright misquotes and changes in context with regard to the people being watchdogged. I’ve seen it too often. Yes, they believe what they want to believe. Yes, they only listen to those who they already have a propensity to agree with, but in too many cases, the information is erroneous and it simply snowballs downhill from there.

  • Posted by

    Scott reminds his readers about the fact that church history is filled with “some” false prophets . . . who were never the norm or the majority:

    [These remnant-leaning “watch-doggies” want to believe that they are restoring something, but they are attempting to restore something that was never actually lost.]

    And I think he agrees with Peter about how they manufacture, misquote and sometimes simply make things up:

    [Unfortunately, they are so intent on finding the witches in our midst that they begin to create the witches themselves by shaping them out of whole cloth, painting them black and putting large, black, pointed hats on their heads.]

    He comments about how the “watch-doggies” are sure that the American evangelical church is lost, except for them and their followers who recognize the terrible apostasy out there run from it.  I’d suggest that perhaps their concern is legitimate, but not for the reasons they put forth.  Instead, if we (the American church) are in trouble, it is because of the divisive and graceless behavior of the “watch-doggies” in plain view of those who are yet far from God, who watch with disgust (hardly an example of how “they will know us by our love”).  For these “watch-doggies,” reaching lost and hurting people is WAAAAAAY down on their priority list.  They’ve pulled up the drawbridge and admonished their followers to find protection from the world AND most other Christian leaders who will probably lead them astray.

    Yes, if the “watch-doggies” carry the day . . . the American church is in trouble.  I’m an optimist though . . . and I believe Jesus will protect His bride from the wolves and the “watch-doggies.”

    Wendi

  • Posted by Leonard

    I am amazed at my ability to get caught in verbiage of the watch dog.  It is almost as if I came home and found the watch dog barking at me and the thief walked right past without me even noticing.  Every time I come across one of these WD types it pushes a button in me that makes me sad.  I want to try and reach out, build a relationship, connect and share a story of a recovering WD.  What I find is that it is a story they do not value and that in their minds I am an apostate WD.  This hurts but not as much as hell will. 

    Here at MMI there have been several who hijacked posts, slammed other people by misquoting and in turn spit their venom on Todd or some of us.  It is wrong to say; I just don’t have the time to deal with you.  Go save the church from me and I’ll see if we can save the world from sin.  I figure I have 30 years left before I die.  I just don’t want to waste them on WD’s while my neighbor goes to hell.  We wrestle not with flesh and blood, satan knows this and tries his hardest to get me to.  “I am not falling for it any more.” One of my life resolutions is.  Fight the battles that bring people into a friendship with Christ, help hurting people, stop what hurts them and expands the kingdom.  I’ll leave the theological musings on Warren, Hybles, Big MAC to smarter people.  Just my 2 cents.

  • Posted by

    Leonard,

    SO well said! Thank you! But I don’t think there are as many people who are smarter than you than you think, imho…

    Peter

  • Posted by kent

    I have no question that there are many times I need a keeper. What I am less certain of is who has the right to that job. Probably my wife has the first bids to it, then my church leadership, then close friends, or something like that order. But I am fairly certain that people who do not know me or are involved the work I am doin have no right to be my keeper. If I or anyone needs a watch dog there are plenty of involved and qualitified opeople to take care of that task. So since that little issue is handled let them take care of their own arenas and get back to work. Let them discern their own houses.

    And why do they do it public and not in private? Why publish when a confidential phone call would do?

    Well, great, now I am cranky.

  • Posted by

    Great article!!!!  I have seen many “WD’s” who believe it is their job to save us from being to relevant and keeping things going the way they always have.  People don’t like change.  Really I don’t like change myself.  It would be great to just be able to write a sermon and speak to the people once a week and that be enough, but I am not sure that ever was enough.  Preaching sermons the same old way and hanging out at the local dinner ain’t going to cut it anymore.  We need to be engaging in reaching the people.  Thinking outside the box is hard I know that, it requires more time to not just write a sermon but plan some mulit media stuff too, but if it keeps people listening long enough for them to hear what God intended to say to their hearts, well I will take the time for that.

    Jade

  • Posted by Randy Ehle

    What irks me so is not the conviction of these self-appointed keepers-of-the-truth, but the gall they demonstrate in sharing their convictions.  Following a few links from the article quoted here in part, I came to a letter from Ken Silva of Apprising Ministries that he sent last week to Ed Young, Jr.  The first two paragraphs of the letter contained Ken’s curriculum vitae: ordained SBC pastor, president (and, near as I can tell, founder) of Apprising Ministries (http://www.apprising.org), and...it goes downhill from there: associate of Ingrid Schlueter, columnist for one website, and “featured writer” for another.  Frankly, Ken’s status as an ordained pastor is certainly the strongest in that list.  (Hey, I’m co-founder and CFO of a non-profit organization, a “featured writer” at MMI - at least when I can get my posts in on time! - and a contributor to a few other websites!)

    Anyway, Ken’s letter, which you can read at http://www.apprising.org/archives/2007/01/letter_to_ed_yo.html, continues with threats both veiled and not-so-veiled.  I was about to quote a bunch, but this got too long!  Read them for yourself, if you have the stomach.  True to the form of these watchdogs, Mr. Silva concludes his letter with the pseudo-politeness, “Please know that I do not have anything against you personally...” which is immediately followed (in the same sentence) by the passive-aggressive statement that “I am only doing my job as a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to defend His Word.” Well, at least someone is, because apparently, many others (in this case, Ed Young, Jr., ) are not doing their job!

  • Posted by

    Randy,

    Thanks for the link. Something tells me I wouldn’t last very long in Silva’s church.

    I guess I need to make sure I never have anyone working with me in ministry who doesn’t belive everything I do using the exact same words. I too struggle with wierdnesses (i made up that word) in the “Christian fold” such as Oneness Pentecostalism, but to call such a person a non-believer is going a little far, even if I think they’re wrong about things. (I think Ken is wrong about more things, for the record.) I guess it’s all about perfect doctrine after all… Not how you act after all…

    I need to set up my own web site so I can be an authority and send nasty letters to people I don’t know. That would be fun!

  • Posted by Leonard

    Send me one, I have weird doctrine somewhere.

  • Posted by Bart

    Just a thought.  How is what the WD’s do different that what we do here at MMI?  We just said that Ken Silva’s ministry is wrong, he has bad theology, and he is sinning by criticizing Ed Young.  At least he goes directly to Ed and doesn’t post without contacting Ed.  Be careful how you view someones ministry (I do have problems with what this man, Ken, does) without examining what you are doing.  I do not like what the watchdogs do, but am I any different when I post here?

  • Posted by Leonard

    On difference might be that we are not actually looking for what is wrong with someone.  We do not start with there is something wrong and I’ll dig till I find it and we are not actually saying that his theology is wrong but his attack on other people is.  By the way I never heard of Silva till this post so I am not sure his influence is all that great. I would say that his going to directly to Edd first is a misnomer since he also posted his letter before Ed read it.  my 2 cents

  • Posted by

    It’s always interesting to me to think of who Paul is refering to when he refers to causing a weaker brother to stumble. I heard one pastor refer to as “Paul used to like to get a barbrque sandwhich at Applebee’s, but others didn’t hink he should eat there because they served alcohol, so he stopped going so they would not be offended.” Let’s be careful how we practice our grace in front of weaker brothers is the lesson. Some are going to find a demon behind every bush, but God said only He would know the wheat from the tares. Anyone for barbeque?

  • Posted by

    Bart,

    But HE STARTED IT…

    wink

    You really have a very good point, we must be careful. I think there’s a HUGE difference between this group and the watchdogs, and I think you are reminding us that we have to work to keep it that way.

    I suspect you look up the archives of Slice of Laodicea (they’re probably still cached on google) and read the posts and especially the comments, then compare to this site, specifically this post… I think you’ll see a huge difference.

    We must work to keep it this way!

    Thanks, Bart.

  • Posted by Randy Ehle

    Bart, your words of caution are well-taken, but let me suggest some differences based on your comments.  While there certainly is criticism of Ken Silva’s ministry, I don’t think anyone here said that he has bad theology or is sinning.

    As for Ken having gone directly to Ed and not posting without contacting Ed, that’s not accurate.  While he went directly to Ed, his letter clearly states that it had already been posted at several websites.  I would argue that his process was not in line with Matthew 18, which requires going to the offending person first and giving them the opportunity to repent as necessary; a letter sent after or (at best) at the same time it is posted to the web clearly does not give the recipient the opportunity to respond.

    “Am I any different when I post here?” Generally - but certainly not always - there is a big difference.  The clear message in Ken’s letter and the communication from so many of these “discernment” ministries is that they are right, others are wrong, and change needs to happen to align with their beliefs.  Usually (in my experience), such communications include various threats, demands, and manipulative emotional appeals (e.g., you’re going to hell if you don’t change, TD Jakes will gain prominence in the evangelical community, etc.) These are not characteristic of most of those who post at MMI.

  • Posted by

    Forgive me if I overstepped what others are saying.  Sometimes a watchdog is OK.  Without them we would never know about financial misuse, etc.  I would agree that what we do here is not quite the same, but it sometimes goes beyond discussing the issues and becomes personal.  Just bring up Rick Warren and you will find passion on both sides.  We need to be carefull when we become critical of the role of others ministries.  Those who claim to have a “Discernment” ministry are passionate about what they believe and thier interpetation of right/ wrong and what the Bible says.  I may disagree with what and how they do it, but I love their passion, however misplaced.

  • Posted by scott ragan

    After wading in the Watch Dog Waters for awhile, it is nice to come over to a site like this and read some well-thought-out, non-reactionary thoughts and comments.  It’s not so much that people here agree with what I said.  It’s more that the tone is measured and reasonable and not escalating to the “Scott is going to hell” level that I have been getting used to.  I have to say that doing the two “Tickling One’s Own Ears” posts was cathartic.  After going head to head with Ken, Ingrid and some of their other more “enthusiastic” supporters for the last year, everything inside of me just seemed to yell “Enough!” I was able to purge a lot of the frustration and disappointment out of my spiritual system (at least for now).

  • Page 1 of 1 pages

Post Your Comments:

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Live Comment Preview:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below: